Date: 20080326
Docket: IMM-1335-08
Ottawa, Ontario, March 26, 2008
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore
BETWEEN:
LEONTII
PRENCO
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY
AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Respondent
ORDER
UPON a motion for the stay of execution
of the removal order in respect of the Applicant;
AND UPON the material being before the
Court;
AND UPON hearing counsel for the parties
by telephone conference, March 26, 2008;
THIS COURT RECOGNIZES that in respect to
the Applicant:
(a) there is a serious issue to be
tried;
(b) the Applicant will suffer
irreparable harm unless the Order is granted;
(c) the balance of convenience
rests with the Applicant.
Mr. Leontii Prenco owns and operates his own
successful business which, not only supports him, but also provides employment opportunities
to Canadians and economic benefit to Canada.
In addition to this, Mr. Prenco, owns his own motor vehicle.
Mr. Prenco is a skilled construction worker and
has been praised by his employer as thorough and conscientious.
As can be seen from the supporting documents, he
is also strongly supported by his church and community and is widely held in
high regard.
Mr. Prenco made an unsuccessful claim for
refugee protection based upon his Ukranian ethnicity and his profile as a
practicing Seventh Day Adventist.
Mr. Prenco, who is an epileptic, alleges that he
was subjected to an ongoing and systematic campaign of harassment,
intimidation, threats and varying degrees of ethno-religiously motivated
violence which culminated in attempts to force him to perform military service,
for which he neither is eligible nor liable to perform (and to which he is
religiously and conscientiously opposed) – the cumulative effect of which was
to lead his wife to divorce him; however, as the Immigration and Refugee Board
(IRB) did not consider his fear of persecution to be objectively well-founded,
it rejected his claim.
While his profile did not expose him to a risk
of persecution in the eyes of the IRB, the risk of undue, disproportionate and
excessive ethno-religious hardship would still appear sufficient to meet the
lower threshold required to support a successful Humanitarian and Compassionate
application as it is clear that the interest of ethnic and non traditional
religious minorities in Moldova are reportedly under pressure and the source of
strained relations with other elements within Moldova.
Moreover, there is a positive obligation under
ss. 3(3)(f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C.
2001, c. 27, to construe and apply the Act in a manner consistent with Canada’s
international human rights agreements and the persuasive authority of the
United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) Handbook which states:
71. The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights and the Human Rights Covenant proclaim the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion, which right includes the freedom of a person to change
his religion and his freedom to manifest it in public or private, in teaching,
practice, worship and observance.
THIS COURT ORDERS the
stay of removal from Canada, of the Applicant, which is scheduled for March 27,
2008, and which stay is ordered to remain in effect until a final determination
will have been made in respect of the application of Mr. Prenco for leave and
also for judicial review, should leave be granted.
“Michel M.J. Shore”
Email this Content